Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland
| DOI | 10.1177/002201838404800206 |
| Published date | 01 May 1984 |
| Date | 01 May 1984 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
COURT
OF
APPEAL
IN
NORTHERN
IRELAND
CONSENTS TO CRIMINAL
PROCEEDINGS
R. v. Marron and ors.
Where any person is charged before ajustice with any crime
under
the Explosive Substances Act 1883, no proceedings shall be taken
without
the
consent of the Attorney-General, In
Northern
Ireland,
however, an
Order
of 1972 provided
that
the Director of Public
Prosecutions of
Northern
Ireland could give
the
necessary consent.
By a further
Order,
which
took
effect in 1980, however, the consent
of
the Attorney-General was once again required
and
the Director
ceased to have the power to give the necessary consents as from the
stated date. Meanwhile, however, proceedings
under
the Act had
been begun in five cases, which were eventually the subject of
reference to the Court of Appeal by the Secretary
of
State in R. v.
Marron
and
ors. [1982] N.I. 132. In
each
case, the proceedings
had
been
brought with the consent of
the
Director, and
not
of the
Attorney-General. In some cases, the consent was given before the
cut-off
date,
but
the accused were committed for trial after that
date.
The
Director
later
executed further consents in slightly
different terms. In one case, he consented in respect of several
charges, but consented only later in respect of a further charge which
was added. Before the
Court
of Appeal, the accused, who
had
all
been convicted, submitted
that
since in all cases the further hearing
and the committal for trial had taken place after the
date
on which
the Director had ceased to have
power
to consent, the consent
of
the
Attorney-General should have been obtained: see R. v. Bates
[1911] 1 K.B. 964. They further submitted that, where a fresh
consent had been
obtained,
this superseded the earlier consents,
which could therefore no longer be relied on.
The
Crown's submission was that, where aconsent had been
given by the Director on a date on which he had
power
to consent,
that
consent remained valid, so
that
in
the
cases in which
that
consent had
been
obtained before committal,
there
was no prob-
168
To continue reading
Request your trial